victorsra wrote:Toronto, Chicago and NY would be great. But it is not wise to greaw more after 10 teams. In fact, 8 teams would be ideal, with just Toronto added. Wait for the succes to expand more and to see if the current location are good enough (relocation to the Northeast could be a possibility if some current city fails).

Who is your biggest concern about public/media interest? Salt Lake? New Orleans? Houston?

New Orleans. SLC will be among the top teams in the league (as I said above, more Pacific Islanders).

To make it sustainable. Look at MLS's history. They were born with 10 teams in 1996, expanded to 12 after 2 seasons, returned to 10, and only passed 12 teams in 2007. Rugby now is smaller than soccer at that time AFAIK, it should go slow. Few but good teams. It is better for the future. More than 8 teams can be an unecessary rush.

Suiram wrote:Northeast is denser and older (so maybe a bit more European) but that’s also the problem. Land and facilities (and wages) are not expensive. Issues finding suitable stadiums.

All the proposed teams are in much more spread out markets. But also kind of driven by where clubs had the structures in place along with financial backers.

For the scale MLR clubs are targeting there are loads of cities of a viable size. Becomes the commercial considerations beyond that. And actually some of these somewhat smaller markets may be better in terms of being less saturated with the other major sports.

For sure, I mean there are a lot of big cities by European standards with few major league teams, obviously college sports compete too in USA but I seriously think there are potentially 50 or more cities that could host a team. Its far more about picking the right places that will self sustain and pique national interest on TV.

victorsra wrote:Toronto, Chicago and NY would be great. But it is not wise to greaw more after 10 teams. In fact, 8 teams would be ideal, with just Toronto added. Wait for the succes to expand more and to see if the current location are good enough (relocation to the Northeast could be a possibility if some current city fails).

Who is your biggest concern about public/media interest? Salt Lake? New Orleans? Houston?

by social media interest the houston sabercats are most popular more than 9,000 facebook followers and almost 1,700 at twitter and also apparently they are the ones who have organized more pre-season games and and they are even selling season tickets for these matches

amz wrote:By the look of it and considering that it may attract a wide range of players , probably from South American ARC countries as well, I don't see why should be limited in the future if the grow is normal. There are only International tests to overlap with MLR so I think it can go to even 16 teams if there is interest.

Canadians should jump in as soon as possible if the project is viable.

This season only the June window will overlap. We'll see what the expansion does for next year. But the schedule will move to the left and then take a break during the July window in 2019 and then execute their playoffs in August. Early days, but that's what I gleaned from Lost Afternoon and talking with folks in the league. Here's the bit I grabbed with the announcement of the Sabercats Academy: youtu.be/xNU86dN8E0E?a

amz wrote:By the look of it and considering that it may attract a wide range of players , probably from South American ARC countries as well, I don't see why should be limited in the future if the grow is normal. There are only International tests to overlap with MLR so I think it can go to even 16 teams if there is interest.

Canadians should jump in as soon as possible if the project is viable.

This season only the June window will overlap. We'll see what the expansion does for next year. But the schedule will move to the left and then take a break during the July window in 2019 and then execute their playoffs in August. Early days, but that's what I gleaned from Lost Afternoon and talking with folks in the league. Here's the bit I grabbed with the announcement of the Sabercats Academy: youtu.be/xNU86dN8E0E?a

Thanks, I follow your ytube The main advantage is that for a future extension it doesn't overlap with likes of European Cups or other local Cups (e.g. Anglo-Welsh) so plenty of space if this kicks off.

victorsra wrote:Toronto, Chicago and NY would be great. But it is not wise to greaw more after 10 teams. In fact, 8 teams would be ideal, with just Toronto added. Wait for the succes to expand more and to see if the current location are good enough (relocation to the Northeast could be a possibility if some current city fails).

Who is your biggest concern about public/media interest? Salt Lake? New Orleans? Houston?

New Orleans. SLC will be among the top teams in the league (as I said above, more Pacific Islanders).

New Orleans was my concern too, but they've made some very good signings. Yungert-Eloff could and should be up there with the best halfback combos in the league, the front row is full of internationals and there are other good pieces like Kalm, Tikoisuva and Hughston. They should at least be competitive.

victorsra wrote:To make it sustainable. Look at MLS's history. They were born with 10 teams in 1996, expanded to 12 after 2 seasons, returned to 10, and only passed 12 teams in 2007. Rugby now is smaller than soccer at that time AFAIK, it should go slow. Few but good teams. It is better for the future. More than 8 teams can be an unecessary rush.

I think 12 teams by year two is an acceptable goal, with 16 being the long term goal. Also the more big name markets they get on board early the less likely a rival rugby competition is going to be set up. I hope it stays as a single league, but I know in all likelihood divisions will be created in the future. Probably end up looking something like this in the future:

Big name cities are totally overrated in a competition like this, and frankly in general. If they work out, great, but the number one priority has to be getting commercially viable teams in reasonable venues. Look at PRO last year: San Francisco was a total disaster in terms of crowds and venue while Sacramento drew the best crowds in the league, despite being bottom of the table. Long term the league is definitely going to want to be in most of the big cities, but in the beginning it's best to go where you have the best chance to succeed. And as StroBro often points out, cost of living in big cities like SF and NYC makes it pretty tough on players earning ~$30k/year. Lastly, the NFL managed just fine without having a team in LA for 2 decades. It got 2 teams this year and they are struggling for crowds.

Look at either French or English rugby for inspiration too. Bath, Exeter, Gloucester, Agen, Castres are not big places but get decent crowds and add colour to the league. You need a couple to not look like a regional league but certainly don't need a team in every top 10 city.

Could somebody summarize or share a link how the MLR came into existence and why this should work and not PRO Rugby?I've read a lot in the US Rugby threads, but I still got lost a bit how this came into existence.

How to grow rugby worldwide?Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

RugbyLiebe wrote:Could somebody summarize or share a link how the MLR came into existence and why this should work and not PRO Rugby?I've read a lot in the US Rugby threads, but I still got lost a bit how this came into existence.

How to grow rugby worldwide?Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Is this the full squad? Yeah guess they have gaps to fill in the front row. Looks solid everywhere else though. Kaka and Uhila will be good in the back row. Pati at SH. Very strong at lock which is a notoriously tough position to fill in US rugby. Maybe they will sign some Tongans or something up front.

4N wrote:Is this the full squad? Yeah guess they have gaps to fill in the front row. Looks solid everywhere else though. Kaka and Uhila will be good in the back row. Pati at SH. Very strong at lock which is a notoriously tough position to fill in US rugby. Maybe they will sign some Tongans or something up front.

Pati is a good 7s player but at this point I don't think you can put him up in 15s there with most of the other 9s in the competition: Mack/Suniula (Seattle), Davies/Boyer (Glendale), Yungert (New Orleans), Murphy (Houston) and Reid (Austin). Maybe he's on par with Reid but definitely on the lower end of the league IMO. Kaka and Uhila don't impress me much compared to the other back rows in the league that are littered with caps and A caps (I know Kaka has an A cap). I'd be happy to be wrong though.

Grant Cole of This Is Texas Rugby is broadcasting the fourth Scrimmage live over MixLR...all radio no film. But I suspect one of those Austin Blacks might take film and post it somewhere. Starting at 1:45 CST.

victorsra wrote:To make it sustainable. Look at MLS's history. They were born with 10 teams in 1996, expanded to 12 after 2 seasons, returned to 10, and only passed 12 teams in 2007. Rugby now is smaller than soccer at that time AFAIK, it should go slow. Few but good teams. It is better for the future. More than 8 teams can be an unecessary rush.

Something else to consider is that each of these teams have varying levels of funding. The expectation that they become profitable in year one across all 7 teams is unlikely.

Although we may see 4-8 strong contenders to join the league (in rough order: New York, Toronto, NorCal, Chicago, KC, Vancouver, Boston), not all the founding 7 may survive. Their ramp for turning a profit may be too long for the investors or the city may just not get good traction. As much as its not fair to guess which might fail now, it may be more clear after the first season. Not sure the legal structure of the league, but you might wonder if one team might be at risk of folding, they might look at selling their franchise to one of the teams in other cities looking to secure a spot.

I could see a situation where they settle on 10 teams for a few years, but 1 or 2 of the founding 7 fold shop and sell their rights to participate or simply transfer (if they are worthless), to another group of investors in another city.